Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Very easy to see WHO got the biggest tax cuts. It WASN'T those in the higher tax brackets.
People in the higher brackets got the same cuts as everyone else in the lower brackets. The brackets are marginal rates, not the rate on all income. That means that the million dollar earner got the same tax cuts as the lower earners, plus the cut on the to brackets. You are trying to make it sound like the millionaire pays 37% on their entire income, which is not the case at all.
Very easy to see WHO got the biggest tax cuts. It WASN'T those in the higher tax brackets.
You're expecting liberals to base their opinions on actual facts and then draw logical conclusions from said facts. I can assure you that many of our liberal friends on C-D simply aren't interested in facts or rational discourse.
Everything that isn't explicitly sanctioned by the Constitution by name is shut down.
That would likely trigger a huge recession and social upheaval, because it's not just the federal government and employees that are affected but everything the federal government funds - small businesses, nonprofits, funding for state and local public and private programs, etc. - but OK. Then what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach43ofus
For this thread, SS & Medicare are considered to be entitlements...that is the general concensus.
That doesn't make it fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgdriver74
Eliminate redundancy. If you want the feds to have something to do with say school lunches then give it all to one agency and w9rk efficiently.
Good point. I look at the budget of the nonprofit I work for, and our programs have funding braided from so many federal/state/local government agencies. Streamlining that funding would make things so much simpler on both ends.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me
Charity has never and will never replace a social safety network.
Which is why the social safety net exists in the first place. Government steps in where private charity refuses to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by albert648
A social safety has never successfully provided anything in the way of social safety.
I'd love to hear a logical argument on this one. Has the social safety net eradicated poverty? No. Has it alleviated poverty? Yes.
That would likely trigger a huge recession and social upheaval, because it's not just the federal government and employees that are affected but everything the federal government funds - small businesses, nonprofits, funding for state and local public and private programs, etc. - but OK. Then what?
Social upheaval? The government pissing away trillions of dollars it doesn't have and causing uncontrollable inflation somehow doesn't?
That doesn't make it fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
Good point. I look at the budget of the nonprofit I work for, and our programs have funding braided from so many federal/state/local government agencies. Streamlining that funding would make things so much simpler on both ends.
Yes. Get rid of the middleman. E.g. The government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
Which is why the social safety net exists in the first place. Government steps in where private charity refuses to.
False. Government created the poverty it seeks to alleviate in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
I'd love to hear a logical argument on this one. Has the social safety net eradicated poverty? No. Has it alleviated poverty? Yes.
Your claims are entirely false. Government has NEVER successfully alleviated poverty nor eradicated it. The only thing government has accomplished in its ludicrous war on poverty is transfer poverty from one party to another. In the best case. In reality, it has FAILED to eradicate or alleviate poverty, and it has CREATED more poverty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
So what's your solution?
How about not cause poverty to begin with? Government is the #1 cause of poverty.
This is a follow up thread to an earlier poll where 76% voted as the title states...
Cutting entitlements is political suicide...look at how the Dems SCORCHED the Pubs (Rick Scott) for suggesting how to save Social Security 3 weeks ago. Any party saying that is suicidal.
So, everything else must be cut, except entitlements...initially. We all know that entitlements will need to ultimately be reduced too, but lets start with the easier cuts first to gain traction.
I suggest cutting an equal % across-the-board annually. The amount of the % is up for debate.
Do you support across-the-board cuts in everything except entitlements? Yes, or no, & explain.
What % should it be? I think it should be larger at first, then declining, such as 5% yr 1, 4% yr 2, 3% yr 3, 2% yr 4, then 1% yr 5, then re-assess.
This should be very easy to accomplish, even in DC.
I'm a liberal and I think we should pay off the massive national debt, and balance the budgets annually. That's very important to me.
We have 2 tools to do so, and you've only mentioned one. Cutting spending, and raising taxes. Some tax levels will need to be raised, on the wealthiest individuals and corporations.
And cuts can come from all kinds of things, but I think we should cut heavily from the military excess, before we start cutting entitlements that keep people alive, like social security. We have to do any spending cuts in a socially responsible way.
The mounting debt and deficit budget issue should be a place where we could put aside partisan crap and the usual politics crap, and finally actually come together and figure this thing out and put together a plan to solve it. But we all have to be flexible in our thinking. No one can possibly get everything they want.
It has to start with defense, and then social security/medicare/medicaid. You could cut almost everything else combined and it doesn't make a dent that will do much. That is the reality.
Well there are things such as Biden's "rescue America" plan that not only cost us but the spending also contributes to inflation which cost Americans yet again.
This is hard bc of all the pork and the little pet projects they lobby for for their states.
I would say start by keeping our money in our own country and wean these other countries off of foreign aid (starting with Ukraine and yes, Israel).
I would call for new rules regarding spending bills so stuff isn’t getting snuck in and held hostage in negotiations later.
I fully believe our military is bloated but I also think they are underpaid so that whole thing needs adjusting. Personally it would be most effective if we would quit meddling in other countries’ affairs.
Get rid of the Dept of Ed and leave that to the states.
To address entitlements, the way it is handled currently is a mess so just overhauling that to make it more efficient would help at least. It would not be directly cutting the payments but minimizing the red tape.
Without at least basic guidelines from a federal education dept., I fear that public schools in Mississippi would teach kids all kinds of misinformation, and would fail to teach them about evolution and whatever else conflicts with their theocracy.
That would be my immediate main concern and hesitancy about eliminating it, but otherwise I'd at least be open to hearing the argument. There is definitely a lot of bloat in DC.
Without at least basic guidelines from a federal education dept., I fear that public schools in Mississippi would teach kids all kinds of misinformation, and would fail to teach them about evolution and whatever else conflicts with their theocracy.
That would be my immediate main concern and hesitancy about eliminating it, but otherwise I'd at least be open to hearing the argument. There is definitely a lot of bloat in DC.
There's a lot more misinformation coming out of California than there is from Mississippi. At least Mississippi can distinguish between a man and a woman.
As for federal government "science".....well that is entirely misinformation. The same bunch that endorsed the Food Pyramid don't get to lecture other people about "science" or whatever.
How about not cause poverty to begin with? Government is the #1 cause of poverty.
How do you come to the conclusion that government is the number one cause of poverty? If you take away the benefits the poor currently receive do you think they will magically become not poor?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
